WetlandecologicalandcomplianceassessmentintheSanFr

WetlandecologicalandcomplianceassessmentsintheSanFranciscoBayRegion,California,USA*AndreeBreauxa,*,SteveCochraneb,JulesEvensc,MollyMartindaled,BrucePavlike,LynnSuera,DianaBenneraaCaliforniaRegionalWaterQualityControlBoard,SanFranciscoBayRegion,WatershedDivision,1515ClayStreet,Suite1400,Oakland,CA94612,USAbFrost-Cochrane,Inc.,P.O.Box72065,Oakland,CA94612,USAcAvocetResearchAssociates,P.O.Box839,PointReyesStation,CA94956,USAdUSArmyCorpsofEngineers,SanFranciscoDistrict,333MarketStreet,8thFloor,SanFrancisco,CA94105,USAeBMPEcosciences,582MarketStreet,Suite2000,SanFrancisco,CA94104,USAReceived26November2003;revised8June2004;accepted31August2004AbstractTheSanFranciscoBayRegionoftheCaliforniaRegionalWaterQualityControlBoard(SFBCRWQCB)andtheSanFranciscoDistrictoftheUSArmyCorpsofEngineers(USACOE)arelookingforanexpeditiousmeanstodeterminewhetherregulatedwetlandprojectsproduceecologicallyvaluablesystemsandremainincompliancewiththeirpermits(i.e.fulfilltheirlegalrequirements)untilprojectcompletion.Astudywasthereforeundertakeninwhich20compensatorywetlandmitigationprojectsintheSanFranciscoBayRegionwerereviewedandassessedforbothpermitcomplianceandhabitatfunction,andthiswasdoneusingarapidassessmentmethodadaptedforthispurpose.Thus,inadditiontodeterminingcomplianceandfunction,afurthergoalofthisstudywastotesttheefficacyoftheassessmentmethod,which,ifuseful,couldbeappliednotonlytomitigationprojects,butalsotorestorationprojectsandnaturalwetlandsystems.Surveyresultssuggestthatmostprojectspermitted5ormoreyearsagoareincompliancewiththeirpermitconditionsandarerealizingtheirintendedhabitatfunctions.Thelargerrestorationsitesorthosesituatedbetweenexistingwetlandsitestendtobemoresuccessfulandoffermorebenefitstowildlifethanthesmallerisolatedones.Theseresultsareconsistentwithregulatoryexperiencesuggestingthateconomiesofscalecouldberealizedbothwith(1)largescaleregionalwetlandrestorationsites,throughwhicheffortsarecombinedtocontrolinvasivespeciesandsharecosts,and(2)coordinatedeffortsbyregulatoryagenciestotrackprojectinformationandtomonitortheincreasingnumberandsizeofmitigationandrestorationsites.Inregardtotheassessmentmethods,wefindthattheirvalueliesinprovidingaconsistentprotocolforevaluations,butthattheultimateassessmentwillrelyheavilyonprofessionaljudgment,regulatoryexperience,andthegarneringofpre-assessmentinformation.q2004ElsevierLtd.Allrightsreserved.Keywords:Wetlands;Wetlandassessments;Compensatorymitigationprojects;CleanWaterAct;SanFrancisco;California1.IntroductionUnderthenationalandCalifornia‘nonetlossofwetlands’policy,attemptsaremadetoavoidwetlandlosseswheneverpossible.Intheregulatorycontext,whenthepermitapplicanthasattempted,buthasbeenunable,toavoidorminimizesuchlosses,compensatorymitigationprojectsarerequiredtooffsettheadverseimpactsonexistingwetlands.Thepolicyalsosupportsprojectsforrestoration,creation,andpreser-vationorenhancementofwetlands.1Inordertomeasure0301-4797/$-seefrontmatterq2004ElsevierLtd.Allrightsreserved.doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2004.08.017JournalofEnvironmentalManagement74(2005)217–237*Theopinionspresentedherearethoseoftheauthor(s)anddonotnecessarilyrepresenttheopinionsoftheaffiliatedagenciesrepresented.*Correspondingauthor.Tel.:C15106222324;fax:C15106222460.E-mailaddress:[e-mail](A.Breaux).1Thefollowingtermsapplytowetlandprojects:restorationisusedheretodescribethereturnoffunctionsthatonceexistedintheareabutthatdonotpresentlyexist.Creationreferstoestablishingwetlandfunctionstoasitewheretheyneverexisted.Enhancementreferstoimprovingfunctionsatanexistingwetlandsite.Preservationreferstomaintainingawetlandinitsexistingconditionandprovidingsomemechanismtomaintainitscurrentstate.theneedforandsuccessofsuchprojects,anefficientandaccuratewetlandassessmentmethodhaslongbeensought.Over40wetlandassessmentmethodshavebeenpublishedsince1990andmorearebeingdeveloped(NationalResearchCouncil,2001;Bartoldus,1999,2000).Othermethodsarenotformallycategorizedorextensivelytested,butperformthesamegeneralfunctionofevaluatingsitesforbiological,hydrological,orphysio-chemicalsuccessorforcompliancewithregulatorypermits(e.g.DeWeese,1994;SteinandAmbrose,1998).Therehavebeenrepeatedcallsoverthelasttwodecadesfor‘science-based’assessmentmethods,butfewhaveproventobereliableinallregionsoreveninthesameregionoverasubstantialamountoftime.Atthesametime,databasesrunbyregulatoryagenciesarebecomingbloatedwithuselessprojectinformationthatcannotalwaysanswerquestionsasbasicas‘whereistheprojectsite?’,‘whatarethegoals?’,and‘whatarethecriteriausedtodetermineprojectsuccess?’Toomuchislefttoinstitutionalmemory,whichreliesonpeoplewhoarelikelytobeunavailablewhentheprojectsortheirmonitoringperiodsarecompleted.Wereviewedmanyassessmentmethodsandselectedonethatgavemoreattentionthanmosttothepresenceofwildlifeinwetlands.IntheSanFranciscoBayRegion,wildlifehabitatisoneoftheprimaryfunctionsservedbyastreamorwetlandtobefilled,butmostevaluationmethodsdonotspecificallyevaluatethisaspectofwetlandprojects.ThemethodchosenwastheWetlandRapidAssessmentPro